Dismissed

Vinod Ekka @ Petara v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC11 Jul 2016MCRC/2680/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant moved the High Court of Chhattisgarh for regular bail under Section 439 CrPC in connection with theft of transformers and wire tapping. The Court dismissed the bail plea, noting the applicant's habit offending pattern with 36 similar pending cases and the recovery of stolen copper coils from him.

What did the court decide?

Bail application under Section 439 CrPC dismissed; applicant not released on bail.

Vinod Ekka @ Petara Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 2680 of 2016

¶4

Vinod Ekka @ Petara S/O Shri Soharai Ekka Aged About 29 Years R/O Pakar Gaon Jhajhi Para, Police Station - Patthalgaon, Distt. Jashpur Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Applicant Versus

¶6

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Lundra, Distt. Sarguja Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Respondent

¶8

For Applicant : Mr. R.S. Soni, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Anant Bajpai, Panel Lawyer

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶10

Order on Board

¶11

11.07.2016

¶12

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 24-09-2015 in connection with Crime No. 99 of 2015, registered at Police Station Lundra ( wrongly mentioned as Sitapur in the impugned order dated 5-2-2016) District Sarguja (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 411/34 of the IPC and Sections 136, 137, 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Section 3(2)(a) of the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984.

¶13

As per the prosecution case, the applicant was involved in theft of transformers from various places and thereafter had taken out wires out of transformers and sold the copper coil to different purchasers. When investigation was made, copper coil was recovered from the possession of the applicant and thereby the aforesaid offence was committed.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that as one memorandum was recorded in Crime No.130 of 2015, all the offencens are attributed to the applicant whereas there is serious discrepancy in between the statement of the seizure witnesses and the memorandum which would go to show that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He would furhter submit that chargesheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 24-09-2015 and no further investigation is necessary, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶15

Per contra , learned State counsel opposing the bail application would submit that apart from this case, as many as 36 criminal cases of like similar nature of offences are registered against the applicant and the applicant is repeating the similar nature of offence and had stolen transformers from different places and sold the same to different purchasers, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary and other documents.

¶17

Perused the case diary which contains the statement of the list of cases against the applcant which shows that in different police stations 36 cases have been registered against the applicant like similar nature of offence and recoveries thereof were made from him.

¶18

Taking into consideration all facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence and further considering the past back-ground of the applicant against

¶19

whom number of criminal cases have been registered like similar nature of offence, I am not inclined to release the aplicant on bail.

¶20

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., is liable to be and is hereby dismissed

¶21

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge

¶22

Raju

Vinod Ekka @ Petara v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Ekka @ Petara v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prince Malik Alias Chhottu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Koushal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ganti Shridhar @ G.shridhar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Parmanand Nishad Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rajkumar Dheevar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Dev Manjhi @ Devraj Manjhi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh